report on neighbourhood plan for the parishes of ottery st ... · 1. introduction and background...
TRANSCRIPT
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 1
Report on Neighbourhood Plan for the Parishes of Ottery St Mary and West
Hill
2017 - 2031
An Examination undertaken for East Devon District Council with the support of the Ottery St Mary Town Council and West Hill Parish Council
on the submission version of the Plan.
Independent Examiner: Mary O’Rourke BA(Hons) DipTP MRTPI
Date of Report: 13 March 2018
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 2
Contents
Page
Main Findings - Executive Summary 3
1. Introduction and Background 3 • Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood Plan
2017 – 2031 3
• The Independent Examiner 4
• The Scope of the Examination 5
• The Basic Conditions 6
2. Approach to the Examination 6
• Planning Policy Context 6 • Submitted Documents 7
• Site Visit 7 • Written Representations with or without Public
Hearing 7
• Modifications 8
3. Procedural Compliance and Human Rights 8
• Qualifying Body and Neighbourhood Plan Area 8
• Plan Period 8
• Neighbourhood Plan Preparation and Consultation 8
• Development and Use of Land 9
• Excluded Development 9
• Human Rights 10
4. Compliance with the Basic Conditions 10
• EU Obligations 10 • Main Issues 11 • Introduction 11
• Issue 1 – the built and natural environment 12 • Issue 2 – local green spaces 21
• Issue 3 – housing, community facilities,
infrastructure and the economy
23
• Issue 4 – accessibility and energy policies 29
5. Conclusions 30
• Summary 30
• The Referendum and its Area 30
• Overview 30
Appendix: Modifications 32
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 3
Main Findings - Executive Summary
From my examination of the Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood Plan (the Plan) and its supporting documentation including the representations
made, I have concluded that subject to the policy modifications set out in this report, the Plan meets the Basic Conditions.
I have also concluded that:
- The Plan has been prepared and submitted for examination by a qualifying body – this was originally the Ottery St Mary Parish Council
which, following a community governance review which created a new parish council for West Hill, is now the Ottery St Mary Town Council and West Hill Parish Council;
- The Plan has been prepared for an area properly designated – the former Ottery St Mary Parish, within which wholly lies the new parish
of West Hill, and shown on the map at page 5 of the Plan;
- The Plan specifies the period to which it is to take effect – 2017 to 2031; and
- The policies relate to the development and use of land for a
designated neighbourhood area.
I recommend that the Plan, once modified, proceeds to Referendum on the
basis that it has met all the relevant legal requirements.
I have considered whether the referendum area should extend beyond the
designated area to which the Plan relates and have concluded that it should
not.
1. Introduction and Background
Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood Plan 2017 – 2031
1.1 Ottery St Mary and West Hill lie to the south of the A30 between Honiton
to the north east and Exeter to the west. Sidmouth and the East Devon coast are around 6 miles to the south. The Plan area includes a number
of settlements, the largest being the town of Ottery St Mary, which is the
main service centre for the area, as well as the villages of West Hill, Tipton St John and Alfington. There are also smaller villages and hamlets
in the area including Wiggaton, Taleford, Fairmile, Fenny Bridge, Fluxton
and Higher Metcombe. In 2011, the Census data showed a resident
population of 8,439 people with a higher percentage than the national average of people over 65 years. However, the Plan notes that significant
development in the area since then is likely to have altered the population
profile.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 4
1.2 The rural landscape is defined by the River Otter which runs through the centre of the area, passing through both the town of Ottery St Mary and
Tipton St John. The valley forms a wide shallow bowl, overlooked on its western side by West Hill and Broad Oak and to the east by the high ridge
of East Hill and Beacon Hill which lie within the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
1.3 The decision to prepare a Neighbourhood Plan was taken in mid-2014 and was seen as providing an opportunity for the local community to have
greater influence over locally focussed planning policies at a time of
significant development pressure. The formal application for designation as a Neighbourhood Area was approved by East Devon District Council in
January 2015. Originally defined as the Parish of Ottery St Mary, in July
2016, West Hill was granted independent Parish status, taking effect on 1
April 2017. The Plan has been prepared by a Working Group, comprising councillors and volunteers from both local communities. The Consultation
Statement, which accompanied the submitted Plan, details the
consultation strategy, the visioning workshops and consultation events held to engage with the local community and discussions with key
stakeholders.
1.4 The Vision and Objectives for the Plan, set out in Chapter 4, reflect public consultation and are to protect and enhance the special qualities of the
Parishes and to provide a sustainable future for their economy,
environment and communities. The area’s countryside is seen as its crowning glory and is to be protected for future generations with the
individual character and integrity of the town, villages and smaller settlements supported and enhanced through appropriately sited high-quality development that make a positive contribution to their
surroundings. Beginning with the Environment, the Plan addresses a number of relevant topics, putting forward planning policies and proposed
‘projects’ which go beyond planning policy but are aspirational. They are
designed to help achieve the underlying Vision and Objectives. Generally, the Plan has a clear structure and overall purpose and is easy to read.
The Independent Examiner
1.5 As the Plan has now reached the examination stage, I have been
appointed as the examiner of the Ottery St Mary and West Hill
Neighbourhood Plan by East Devon District Council, with the agreement of
the Ottery St Mary Town Council and West Hill Parish Council.
1.6 I am a chartered town planner and former government Planning
Inspector, with some 40 years of experience in the public and private
sector, more recently determining major planning appeals and examining
development plans and national infrastructure projects. I have previous
experience of examining neighbourhood plans. I am an independent
examiner, and do not have an interest in any of the land that may be
affected by the draft Plan.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 5
The Scope of the Examination
1.7 As the independent examiner I am required to produce this report and
recommend either:
(a) that the neighbourhood plan is submitted to a referendum without
changes; or
(b) that modifications are made and that the modified neighbourhood plan
is submitted to a referendum; or
(c) that the neighbourhood plan does not proceed to a referendum on the
basis that it does not meet the necessary legal requirements.
1.8 The scope of the examination is set out in Paragraph 8(1) of Schedule 4B
to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (‘the 1990
Act’). The examiner must consider:
• Whether the Plan meets the Basic Conditions;
• Whether the Plan complies with provisions under s.38A and s.38B of
the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) (‘the
2004 Act’). These are:
- it has been prepared and submitted for examination by a
qualifying body, for an area that has been properly designated
by the local planning authority;
- it sets out policies in relation to the development and use of
land;
- it specifies the period during which it has effect;
- it does not include provisions and policies for ‘excluded
development’;
- it is the only neighbourhood plan for the area and does not
relate to land outside the designated neighbourhood area;
- whether the referendum boundary should be extended beyond
the designated area, should the Plan proceed to referendum;
and
• Such matters as prescribed in the Neighbourhood Planning
(General) Regulations 2012 (as amended)(‘the 2012 Regulations’).
1.9 I have considered only matters that fall within Paragraph 8(1) of Schedule
4B to the 1990 Act, with one exception. That is the requirement that the
Plan is compatible with the Human Rights Convention.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 6
The Basic Conditions
1.10 The ‘Basic Conditions’ are set out in Paragraph 8(2) of Schedule 4B to the
1990 Act. In order to meet the Basic Conditions, the Neighbourhood Plan
must:
- Have regard to national policies and advice contained in guidance
issued by the Secretary of State;
- Contribute to the achievement of sustainable development;
- Be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the
development plan for the area;
- Be compatible with and not breach European Union (EU) obligations;
and
- Meet prescribed conditions and comply with prescribed matters.
1.11 Regulation 32 of the 2012 Regulations prescribes a further Basic Condition
for a neighbourhood plan. This requires that the neighbourhood plan
should not be likely to have a significant effect on a European Site (as
defined in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017) or
a European Offshore Marine Site (as defined in the Offshore Marine
Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 2007), either alone or in
combination with other plans or projects.
2. Approach to the Examination
Planning Policy Context
2.1 The Development Plan for this part of East Devon District Council, not
including documents relating to excluded minerals and waste
development, is the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031, adopted in January
2016. It is up to date and provides the relevant strategic background for
assessing general conformity. The District Council is progressing the East
Devon Villages Plan, (the Villages Plan) which was subject to examination
in 2017 and consultation on the Schedule of Main Modifications concluded
on 2 February 2018. It identifies built up area boundaries (BUABs) for
those other settlements identified in Local Plan Strategy 27. The Villages
Plan includes a BUAB for West Hill. Paragraph 184 of the NPPF states,
“The ambition of the neighbourhood should be aligned with the strategic
needs and priorities of the wider area”. Accordingly, I have had regard for
the Proposed Submission Draft and the proposed modifications of the
Villages Plan which is currently undergoing examination.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 7
2.2 East Devon District Council are also partners in the emerging Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP), along with Exeter City, Teignbridge and Mid Devon
Councils. It is an early stage of preparation with consultation in 2017 on issues and a call for sites. The Draft GESP is to be consulted on in 2018.
2.3 The planning policy for England is set out principally in the National Planning
Policy Framework (NPPF). The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) offers
guidance on how this policy should be implemented.
Submitted Documents
2.4 I have considered all policy, guidance and other reference documents I
consider relevant to the examination, including those submitted which
comprise:
• the draft Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood Plan 2017 -2031; • the Map on page 5 of the Plan which identifies the area to which the
proposed neighbourhood development plan relates;
• the Consultation Statement, July 2017; • the Basic Conditions Statement, July 2017;
• all the representations that have been made in accordance with the
Regulation 16 consultation; and
• the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Screening Opinion prepared by East Devon District Council dated May 2017.
2.5 I have also had regard to the detailed reply of the Working Group dated
27 January 2018 and new viewpoint maps and inset maps submitted in
response to my letter of 16 January 2018 and its letter of 31 January
2018 regarding policy NP4.1
Site Visit
2.6 I made an unaccompanied site visit to the Neighbourhood Plan Area on 4
January 2018 to familiarise myself with it, and visit relevant sites and
areas referenced in the Plan and evidential documents.
Written Representations with or without Public Hearing
2.7 This examination has been dealt with by written representations. I
considered hearing sessions to be unnecessary as the consultation
responses clearly articulated the objections to the Plan, and presented
arguments for and against the Plan’s suitability to proceed to a
referendum. There has been no request for hearing sessions to be held.
1http://www.otterystmary-tc.gov.uk/Ottery-St-Mary-Town-
Council/Neighbourhood_Plan_22718.aspx
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 8
Modifications
2.8 Where necessary, I have recommended modifications to the Plan (PMs) in
this report in order that it meets the Basic Conditions and other legal
requirements. For ease of reference, I have listed these modifications
separately in the Appendix.
3. Procedural Compliance and Human Rights
Qualifying Body and Neighbourhood Plan Area
3.1 The Neighbourhood Plan for the Parishes of Ottery St Mary and West Hill
has been prepared in unusual circumstances. An application to East
Devon District Council for the then parish of Ottery St Mary, which
included the village of West Hill, to be designated a neighbourhood
planning area was made, and accepted in January 2015.
3.2 The Foreword to the Plan explains that since that designation, West Hill
has been granted independent status as a parish but remains part of the
designated neighbourhood plan area. Paragraph 1.3 of the Plan provides
further detail and clarifies that both communities have been fully engaged
in preparing the Plan and that the formation of a separate West Hill parish
has no bearing on its content. Whilst the parish of Ottery St Mary was the
original qualifying body, the Plan has been prepared and is submitted for
examination by Ottery St Mary Town Council together with the recently
formed West Hill Parish Council.
3.3 It is the only neighbourhood plan for Ottery St Mary and West Hill, and
does not relate to land outside the designated neighbourhood area.
Plan Period
3.4 The Plan specifies clearly the period to which it is to take effect, which is from 2017 to 2031.
Neighbourhood Plan Preparation and Consultation
3.5 The Neighbourhood Plan has been prepared in response to the Localism
Act 2011 and the Government’s approach to planning which aims to give local communities more say about what goes on in their area. Following designation of the neighbourhood planning area, a Working Group was
established early in 2015 comprising councillors, representatives of community organisations, businesses, stakeholders and members of the
public. A range of methods was used to engage with the community
during the plan preparation period including social media, press releases,
leaflets delivered to every household in the area, community newsletters, a dedicated webpage, regular updates at Town Council meetings and
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 9
attendance at various public events. In addition, local businesses in Ottery St Mary and the villages were contacted, along with community
clubs and organisations, and particular efforts were made to engage with difficult to reach groups, including teenagers.
3.6 Six visioning workshops attended by 170 people were held across the Plan
area in September and October 2015 and an initial questionnaire seeking
views from residents was distributed at the workshops, handed out at the two primary schools and the Christmas lights events, and put on the Town
Council website. The 74 questionnaires completed helped to identify key
themes and priorities for the Plan to address. A public exhibition held in January 2016 was well attended and showed broad support for the
themes and objectives identified. In addition, the Working Group held
meetings with education and healthcare providers and with Historic
England and consultants commissioned to undertake a public realm survey. However, the Consultation Statement notes little interest from
the business community in engaging with the neighbourhood planning
process.
3.7 The Pre-Submission Plan was produced in March 2017 and was widely
publicised with leaflets delivered to every household in the parishes and a
further series of public consultation events were held in June 2017. Some 13 responses were received from statutory consultees (including East
Devon District Council, Natural England etc) with an additional 32
responses from individuals. The Consultation Statement at Appendices K and L sets out these Regulation 14 responses.
3.8 The consultation responses were taken into account, where considered
appropriate, in revising the submitted Plan. The submitted
Neighbourhood Plan was subject to a further 6-week consultation in October and November 2017 under Regulation 16, and I have taken
account of the 11 responses received in writing this report, as well as the
earlier Consultation Statement. I am satisfied that a transparent, fair and inclusive consultation process has been followed for this Neighbourhood
Plan, having due regard to the advice in the PPG on plan preparation and
in procedural compliance with the legal requirements. .
Development and Use of Land
3.9 The Plan sets out policies in relation to the development and use of land in
accordance with s.38A of the 2004 Act.
Excluded Development
3.10 The Plan does not include provisions and policies for ‘excluded
development’.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 10
Human Rights
3.11 The Basic Conditions Statement at section 6 states that the Plan has had
regard to the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under the
European Convention on Human Rights and complies with the Human
Rights Act 1998. East Devon District Council has not alleged that the
Plan breaches Human Rights (within the meaning of the Human Rights Act
1998). I have considered this matter independently and I have found no
reason to disagree with that position.
4. Compliance with the Basic Conditions
EU Obligations
4.1 The Plan was screened for SEA by East Devon District Council. This is a
legal requirement and accords with Regulation 15(e)(1) of the 2012
Regulations. The Council found it was unnecessary to undertake SEA and
neither Historic England nor Natural England disagreed with that
assessment. Having read the SEA Screening Opinion and considered the
matter independently, I agree with that conclusion.
4.2 The Plan was further screened for Habitats Regulations Assessment
(HRA). A small part of the Pebblebed Heath Special Area of Conservation
(SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA) and Site of Special Scientific Interest
(SSSI) lies within the Plan area, at the extreme south west edge of Ottery
St Mary parish, and the Plan area is within its mitigation zone. The Plan
allocates one specific site for new housing, at Alfington, to the north of the
parish, and identified in policy NP27 as suitable for up to 5 houses. The
assessment undertaken by the District Council notes that mitigation is
provided for in the policy requirement for a small equipped play park,
reducing the need for local residents to travel to facilities elsewhere, and
that a range of larger alternative areas for recreation and access to the
countryside are also available at a similar or closer distance than the
Pebblebed Heath to the site, for example at Ottery St Mary. The Plan does
not propose a level of development significantly over and above that in
the adopted Local Plan, which was itself subject to HRA, and, should
adverse impacts arise, there is an agreed range of mitigation measures
which will be implemented. The conclusion of the District Council is that
the Plan is unlikely to have an adverse effect on a European site, alone or
in combination with other plans and projects. Having reviewed the Plan,
Natural England considered that there were unlikely to be any significant
environmental effects on sensitive sites. On the basis of the information
provided and my independent consideration, I agree that HRA is not
necessary.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 11
Main Issues
4.3 Having regard for the Submission Version of the Ottery St Mary and West
Hill Neighbourhood Plan, the consultation responses and other evidence,
and the site visit, I consider that there are four main issues relating to the
Basic Conditions for this examination. These are:
• whether the Neighbourhood Plan policies for the built and natural environment will secure high standards of design and protect heritage and
environmental assets in line with national policy and are in general
conformity with the strategic policies in the Local Plan; • whether the Plan appropriately provides for the designation and protection
of local green spaces, having regard to national planning policy and guidance and the need to be consistent with the local planning of sustainable development;
• whether the policies for housing, community facilities, infrastructure and
the economy provide an appropriate framework to shape and direct
sustainable development, having regard to national policy and guidance
and are in general conformity with the strategic policies in the Local Plan;
and
• whether the accessibility and energy policies in the Plan meet the Basic
Conditions particularly in relation to conformity with national policy and
guidance.
Introduction
4.4 The Neighbourhood Plan for Ottery St Mary and West Hill begins with an
introduction to the plan process before setting out in Chapter 2 a portrait
of the parishes and their two main settlements. Chapter 3 then goes on
to set out the key issues for the Plan area and background evidence on its
population, landscape, character, built heritage, accessibility,
infrastructure, housing and economy. Chapter 4 sets out the Vision and
Objectives for the area to 2031 which emerged from the consultation
exercises and from which the policies have been developed and Chapter 5
explains how the vision is to be delivered through the policies and projects
of the Plan. These introductory chapters set out a clear and robust
structure for the planning of the area over the next 13 years, based on
consultation with the local communities and which have regard to national
and local policy.
4.5 In addition to its 27 policies, the Plan identifies 14 projects. These do not
fall to be considered in this examination against the Basic Conditions.
Advice in the PPG2 is that community projects are best included in a
separate annex or companion document. However, in this case, a cogent
case has been made by the Working Group that the context for the
2 PPG Reference ID: 41-004-20170728.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 12
projects is best understood by including them in the main document; it
would be difficult to understand their relevance if they were separated out
with the need for constant cross-referencing to the main text; and the
local community very much felt that the policies and projects were
inseparable to delivering the Plan’s vision for the area. Given that the
projects themselves are clearly distinguished by coloured boxes from the
policies and are written in a way that makes clear their purpose and who
will take action, I find that it is reasonable here to leave the Projects in
the main body of the Plan.
4.6 I now turn, in the following paragraphs, to address each of my four main
issues.
Issue 1 – the built and natural environment
4.7 The Vision Statement sets out the vision of the Plan to protect and
enhance the special qualities of the parishes of Ottery St Mary and West
Hill and to provide a sustainable future for their economy, environment
and communities. The countryside is ‘its crowning glory and will be
protected for future generations’. Objectives of the Plan include to protect
and enhance the character and nature of the settlements, ensuring new
development proposals are suitably scaled, complementary and locally
distinct, and that the habitat and scenic value of the area is preserved and
enhanced.
Countryside
4.8 The Plan area includes the settlements of Ottery St Mary and West Hill for
which built up area boundaries (BUABs) are respectively defined in the
adopted Local Plan and in the recently examined Villages Plan. Land
outside those BUABs is defined in the Local Plan as countryside where
Strategy 7 only permits development ‘where it is in accordance with a
specific Local Plan or Neighbourhood Plan policy that explicitly permits
such development and where it would not harm the distinctive landscape,
amenity and environmental qualities within which it is located’.
4.9 Policy NP1 of the Plan deals with the countryside and is described in
paragraph 6.5 of the supporting text as adding further detail (to Strategy
7) for the consideration of applications for development in response to the
specific challenges to preserving the countryside in the Plan area. The
Working Group’s January 2018 response notes the very high pressure for
development in this part of East Devon, its closeness to the major
expansion area at Cranbrook leading to increased interest from developers
to build higher value housing in the countryside, and the recent significant
growth in new homes in Ottery St Mary, many of which were built outside
the then BUAB; all of which are argued to justify the higher level of
protection for the countryside being sought through policy NP1.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 13
4.10 However, in not allowing development ‘other than in exceptional
circumstances’, 3 I am concerned that the Plan inappropriately applies the
stringent test for Green Belt protection to the countryside around Ottery
St Mary, which is not Green Belt. Whilst national policy requires that
planning should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the
countryside, it should also support thriving communities within it4,
promote a strong rural economy5, and support sustainable rural
communities6 with well located housing. No explanation is given in the
supporting text to policy NP1 as to what might be considered as
constituting ‘exceptional circumstances’, thus giving no guidance to
decision makers to be able to apply it consistently and with confidence,
contrary to the PPG7. In addition, there are internal inconsistencies within
the Plan itself. For example, policy NP4 sets out criteria for development
that may be permitted in the settlement containment area between Ottery
St Mary and West Hill and policy NP20, consistent with Local Plan Strategy
28 and NPPF paragraph 28, is permissive of farm-based tourism, which
likely will be in the countryside and thus, on the face of it, at odds with
policy NP1 as drafted.
4.11 I am not satisfied that policy NP1, as drafted, has had adequate regard to
national guidance and policy. Moreover, it lacks the necessary clarity to
enable a decision maker to be able to apply it consistently and with
confidence when determining planning applications8. Subject to the
deletion of the first sentence (PM1), I am satisfied that the remainder of
policy NP1 provides useful detail for applicants as to the features of
importance for the maintenance of the rural character of the area which
should be protected and retained.
Design
4.12 It is a core planning principle in the NPPF to always seek to secure high
quality design and paragraph 58 requires local and neighbourhood plans
to develop robust and comprehensive policies that set out the quality of
development that will be expected for the area. Strategy 48 of the Local
Plan emphasises the critical importance of local distinctiveness and local
design standards in the development process and the use of local
materials and local forms and styles. Policy NP2 of the Plan builds on the
strategic policy and on the design standards set out in the Local Plan, in
3 The Landmark Chambers’ paper referred to in the Working Group’s letter of 27 January
2018 deals explicitly with this phrase in relation to Section 9 of the NPPF and protecting
Green Belt land. 4 NPPF paragraph 17 5th bullet. 5 NPPF paragraph 28. 6 NPPF paragraph 55 and PPG Reference ID: 41-044-20160519. 7 PPG Reference ID: 41-041-20140306. 8 PPG Reference ID: 41-041-20140306.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 14
particular policies D1 to D3, to ensure new development embraces locally
distinctive design and engenders a sense of place. I am satisfied that
policy NP2, in setting out guidance on the scale, density, layout,
landscape, materials, and parking for new development in relation to
neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally, is not
unnecessarily prescriptive. In seeking to promote local distinctiveness,
policy NP2 has had regard to the NPPF paragraphs 58, 59 and 60, and is
in general conformity with policies Strategy 6 and 48 of the Local Plan. In
contributing to the achievement of sustainable development, it accords
with the Basic Conditions.
4.13 The NPPF at paragraph 53 advises local planning authorities to consider
the case for setting out policies to resist inappropriate development of
residential gardens, for example where development would cause harm to
the local area. In the Local Plan, Strategy 6 requires that within BUABs,
development should be compatible with the character of the site and its
surroundings and design management policy D1 addresses design and
local distinctiveness, resisting development that adversely affects the
existing urban form and the amenity of existing residents. The Plan refers
at paragraph 6.10, to pressure in the area in recent years for
development on infill plots and the subdivision of gardens, particularly in
West Hill. Whilst accepted as making a valuable contribution to the
provision of local housing and enhancing the sustainability of settlements,
backland and garden development is noted as potentially having adverse
impacts on residents and on the character of the area. Policy NP3
therefore sets out criteria for infill, backland and residential garden
development to ensure proposals reflect the character, density and
boundary treatments of the surrounding area, protect the amenity of
neighbours, and provide adequate amenity and off-street parking.
4.14 As drafted policy NP3 has two distinct parts; the first being positively
worded and setting out criteria which proposals should comply with if
permission is to be permitted and then in the second part, setting out
those circumstances where proposals will be resisted. Although the latter
is essentially the reverse of the first, it seems to me reasonable in an area
where pressure is likely to continue for small infill schemes to set out
clearly for developers what they have to do to secure permission and
where that would be refused. However as drafted the policy is not well
laid out with the two sets of criteria sitting side by side, and I am
recommending a modification to the Plan to clarify that policy NP3 is in
two parts, to be set out as policy NP3 (A) and NP3 (B) (PM2). Subject to
the recommended modification, I am satisfied that the policy has regard
to national policy and guidance, is in general conformity with strategic
policies, would contribute to sustainable development and therefore meets
the Basic Conditions.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 15
Settlement containment
4.15 In recent years, the parishes have experienced significant development
pressures with permissions granted between 2012 and 2015 for around
600 new homes in and around Ottery St Mary and at West Hill. Concerns
at the visioning workshops included the amount of new housing, the
pressure on existing infrastructure and services, and the impact on the
special character of the area over time with pressure from house builders
to develop around the edges of these settlements outside of their BUABs.
To support the long-term preservation of the settlements and maintain
their separation, the Plan proposes a policy of settlement containment
(policy NP4) on land to the south and west of Ottery St Mary and to the
east and north of West Hill.
4.16 Representations have been made that the District Council and Local Plan
Inspector have already rejected the identification in the Local Plan of a
Green Wedge between Ottery St Mary and West Hill: yet policy NP4, to all
intents and purposes, promotes a Green Wedge Policy that is unjustified.
I accept that criteria 2 and 5 of policy NP4 are very similarly worded to
Strategy 8, in seeking to maintain the separate identity of the settlements
and discourage settlement coalescence. But whilst Ottery St Mary and
West Hill are some 1.5km apart, there is evidence in representations
made on the Plan of pressure for the release of land on their edges, and I
am satisfied that there is local justification for a settlement containment
policy in this location. In that criteria 1, 3 and 4 require that the open
and undeveloped feel of the land is not compromised, the landscape
setting of the settlement is not harmed, and existing isolated development
in the countryside is not consolidated, policy NP4 accords with both
national and strategic policy to protect the countryside and direct
development to sustainable locations.
4.17 I am satisfied that policy NP4, as drafted, is in general conformity with
and supports strategic policies Strategies 7 and 24 in the Local Plan to
restrict development in the countryside and to see development at Ottery
St Mary focused on meeting local needs with new homes provided within
the BUAB. Further it has regard to Government policy in the NPPF that
neighbourhoods should ‘plan positively to support local development,
shaping and directing development in their area that is outside the
strategic elements of the Local Plan’9.
4.18 Policy NP4 is an important plank in the raft of policies in the Plan to
protect the countryside and direct development to the main settlements,
in accord with the strategic policies of the Local Plan. However, I have
serious concerns at the way in which the area to which policy NP4 is
intended to apply is identified in the Plan. Whilst the policy is described
9 NPPF paragraph 16 2nd bullet point.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 16
as applying to development of land to the south and west of Ottery St
Mary and to the east and north of West Hill, the only representation on
the submitted Inset Maps is two short green lines; one running along the
former BUAB to the north of West Hill and the other opposite The King’s
School, Ottery St Mary, and running along the other side of the lane to
the new housing estate at Island Farm. From a development
management point of view, it is not sufficient to say that policy NP4 would
cover all of the land between the green lines10, when the lines do not face
each other.
4.19 In response to my concerns at this ambiguity in the Plan11, the Working
Group, with the assistance of the District Council, has clarified the area to
which policy NP4 would apply by reference to physical features on the
ground12. I am satisfied, from what I saw on my site visit, that the area
shown cross hatched on the new plan that would be subject to policy NP4
is appropriately drawn, having regard to the objective of the policy and its
detailed wording.
4.20 Subject to modifications to Appendix 1 to the Plan to remove the green
lines shown on the Ottery St Mary and West Hill Inset Maps and to include
the new plan showing the NP4 settlement containment area (PM3), I
conclude that by shaping and directing development so as to protect and
preserve the settlements and their unique qualities, policy NP4 will
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, and I am
satisfied that it meets the Basic Conditions.
Valued views
4.21 Government policy is that the planning system should contribute to and
enhance the natural and local environment, amongst other things, by
protecting and enhancing valued landscapes. Paragraph 113 of the NPPF
requires local planning authorities to set criteria-based policies against
which development proposals on or affecting landscape areas will be
judged. Strategy 46 of the Local Plan addresses landscape conservation
and enhancement and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), and
requires that development is undertaken in a manner sympathetic to, and
which helps conserve and enhance the quality and local distinctiveness of,
the natural and historic landscape character of East Devon, in particular in
AONBs.
4.22 Part of the Plan area to the south and including part of the village of
Tipton St John lies within the East Devon AONB, and subject to the
10 Letter of 31 January 2018 from Jo Talbot, Chair Ottery St Mary and West Hill
Neighbourhood Plan. 11 My letter of 9 February 2018 to Jo Talbot. 12 Email from Jo Talbot to IPE Ltd dated 19 February 2018 with attached plan and note.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 17
highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty13.
In addition, in consultations carried out during the preparation of the Plan,
there was strong support in the community for the protection of what
were considered to be key views in and around the settlements in the
parishes that were important to the overall local character of the area.
Paragraph 6.22 refers to the Working Group identifying valued views that
merit specific protection and listed in Appendix 2 as subject to policy NP6.
4.23 I am satisfied that in terms of its wording, policy NP6 has regard to
national guidance on valued landscapes/views, is in general conformity
with Strategy 46 of the Local Plan and is sufficiently flexible not to
preclude sustainable development. However, I have serious concerns in
respect of Appendix 2 which lists 16 views but describes them in very
general terms. For example, just to take the first listed, ‘along the River
Otter Valley throughout the Parish’ gives no indication of the location of
the viewpoint (indeed whether it is one or multiple viewpoints), the
direction and extent of the view and what in that view is assessed as
being important. Similar comments can be made for most of the others
listed. There are background papers on the East Devon District Council
website which include some protected view cone maps, but they are not
easy to read and have the appearance of field notes. I consider it
unreasonable to require developers and/or decision makers to have to
search for evidence to try and work out where a policy applies.
4.24 Once made, the Plan will form part of the statutory development plan and
its policies will control and influence development in the local area for the
next 13 years. Planning guidance requires, therefore, that policies should
be clear and unambiguous, drafted with sufficient clarity that a decision
maker can apply them consistently and with confidence when determining
planning applications14. I am not satisfied that Appendix 2 offers that
confidence. Indeed, I note that the District Council in its initial feedback
on the Plan in November 2016 had asked that ‘to provide clarity, this
policy requires a clear map showing the important views and viewpoints
as there is concern that the policy could be used to argue against any
development that would in some way affect these views’.
4.25 In response to my letter of 16 January 2018, the District Council, on
behalf of the Working Group, has reworked the field notes and provided
maps showing the direction and extent of 35 views to which policy NP6 is
proposed to apply around Alfington, Ottery St Mary, Tipton St John and
West Hill and Higher Metcombe. They include places where there are
views in one or more directions and where there are a number of views,
for example, along a section of riverside. The Plan covers an area of
attractive countryside including the Otter valley with long views of the
13 NPPF paragraph 115. 14 PPG Reference ID: 41-041-20140306.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 18
East Hill ridge and I am satisfied from what I saw on my site visit that the
identified views are special to the area and justify policy protection. I am
therefore proposing to modify policy NP6 to substitute the 4 Key
Viewpoints maps for Appendix 2, include the 4 Key Viewpoints maps in
Appendix 1 and delete Appendix 2. Subject to these modifications (PM4),
I am satisfied that the Plan has regard to national policy and guidance,
would be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the Local
Plan, and would contribute to the achievement of sustainable
development, thus meeting the Basic Conditions.
Natural environment
4.26 It is Government policy to conserve and enhance the natural environment.
Paragraph 114 of the NPPF requires that local planning authorities should
set out a strategic approach in their Local Plans, planning positively for
the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of
biodiversity and green infrastructure. The Local Plan includes both
strategic (Strategy 5) and development management policies (EN4 and
EN5) for the protection of areas of biodiversity importance and interest
and to support important wildlife habitats and features not otherwise
protected by policies.
4.27 Aside from the internationally and nationally protected Pebblebed Heath,
on the southern fringe of the Plan area, there are County Wildlife Sites
and also a number of what are described as Unconfirmed Wildlife Sites,
which are said to have possible interest but have not been fully surveyed.
Having regard to the advice in the PPG15, I am not satisfied that there is
the proportionate, robust evidence needed to support the approach taken
in policy NP8 towards the protection of local wildlife sites. Nor is there
anything distinct about the policy to indicate that it is reflecting and
responding to any particular unique characteristics or planning context
local to the neighbourhood area. Having said that, given the number of
potential wildlife sites in the area that are still be surveyed, it seems to
me there is a case to be made for all new development proposals to
consider potential ecological impacts at an early stage in their design, as
described in paragraph 6.31. For that reason, I am modifying the Plan to
delete policy NP8 as written and to replace it as policy with paragraph
6.31 (PM5). I consider that such a policy would be in general conformity
with Local Plan Strategy 5, has regard to national policy, and would
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, thus meeting
the Basic Conditions.
15 PPG Reference ID: 41-040-20160211.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 19
Ottery St Mary
4.28 The Local Plan’s vision for Ottery St Mary is to see development focused
on meeting local needs and making the town a more vibrant centre, whilst
conserving and enhancing its fine built heritage and Strategy 24 supports
schemes which enhance the quality of the town’s environment. Chapter 9
of the Plan provides specific policies for the town, the centre of which was
first designated as a Conservation Area in 1973 and which now covers the
historic market and ecclesiastical centre, most of the 19th century
suburbs, and a large area of historic landscape to the north and west
including the small hamlet of Dunkirk. With refurbishment work now
taking place at the Mill, the Conservation Area has been taken off the
National Heritage At Risk Register and the Town Council is looking to
protect and improve the town’s heritage quality and value. Policy NP22
supports proposals that would enhance or conserve the character,
appearance, assets and setting of the Conservation Area. However as
drafted the second part of the policy fails to have sufficient regard to
national policy in the NPPF of the staged approach that must be taken to
determining the impact of a proposed development on, and the weight to
be given to any harm to, the significance of the Conservation Area as a
heritage asset. For this reason, and as the NPPF and Local Plan provide
sufficient protection for heritage assets, I am proposing to modify policy
NP22 by deleting the second sentence to ensure that the Plan meets the
Basic Conditions (PM6).
4.29 Consultation on the Neighbourhood Plan identified a desire by the
community for improvements to the town centre, particularly to address
issues of traffic congestion and inadequate off-street car parking, and a
Public Realm Study, commissioned in 2016, identified various
interventions to enhance the town centre. Whilst many of the suggested
actions, for example upgraded paving and rationalised signage, lie outside
the scope of a land use Plan, and are to be the subject of a Town Council
Project, policy NP23 is supportive of proposals to enhance the public realm
and buildings in the town centre. As the policy refers only to proposals
that will enhance the public realm and buildings, I am modifying the policy
title to delete the words ‘and highway improvements’ (PM7). Subject to
this modification, I am satisfied that policy NP23 meets the Basic
Conditions.
4.30 Car parking capacity is a concern in many historic towns and was a
particular issue for residents consulted on the Plan. Having regard to
Paragraph 40 of the NPPF which requires local authorities to seek to
improve the quality of parking in town centres so that it is convenient,
safe and secure, policy NP24 supports the provision of additional parking
capacity in the town centre to reduce on-street parking and congestion. I
am satisfied that it has regard to national policy, is in general conformity
with the strategic policies of the Local Plan and would contribute to the
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 20
achievement of sustainable development, thus meeting the Basic
Conditions.
West Hill
4.31 Chapter 10 of the Plan deals with West Hill, which is the largest village in
the Plan area and identified in the emerging Villages Plan as a sustainable
settlement with a range of accessible services and facilities, for which a
BUAB is defined. The Villages Plan has been the subject of examination
with consultation on the Inspector’s main modifications ending on 2
February 2018 and the Working Group has confirmed that no
modifications were recommended to the West Hill BUAB, shown on the
Inset map at Appendix 1. Minor modification is recommended to the Inset
map to confirm that the BUAB shown is that proposed to be adopted in
the Villages Plan (PM8).
4.32 West Hill has a locally distinctive wooded character with generally low-
density housing set in spacious treed plots. To help protect and maintain
this special character, the West Hill Design Statement was prepared by
the Residents Association and the Plan refers to its subsequent adoption in
2006 by East Devon District Council as supplementary planning guidance.
Paragraph 10.3 refers to the Design Statement having been reviewed but
the current status of the document is unclear as to whether the review
was undertaken by the District Council or the Residents Association.
Paragraph 10.5 refers to Appendix 6 to the Plan as including further detail
summarised from the reviewed Village Design Statement.
4.33 However, given that the Plan includes a specific policy NP26 on West Hill
Design, I see no justification for appending a summarised version of the
Design Statement to the Plan. Indeed, as there are some differences
between some principles set out in the Appendix 616 and the policy, its
inclusion in the Plan has the potential to confuse applicants/developers
and risk undermining the policy’s clarity. As drafted, policy NP26 is
specific and detailed, giving clear guidance on the design principles to be
incorporated into new residential proposals in West Hill. I am satisfied
that, subject to the deletion of paragraph 10.5 and Appendix 6 (PM9),
policy NP26 will contribute to the achievement of sustainable development
and meet the Basic Conditions.
4.34 Overall, I conclude on my first issue that subject to the recommended
modifications being made, the Neighbourhood Plan policies for the built
and natural environment (alongside the protection of the historic
environment already provided by the NPPF and the Local Plan), will secure
high standards of design and protect heritage and environmental assets,
16 For example, A2 (views out), A4 (building lines), C2 (shared access drives), C4 (limit
to one access per dwelling).
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 21
having regard to national policy and guidance and are in general
conformity with the strategic policies in the Local Plan, thus meeting the
Basic Conditions.
Issue 2 – local green spaces
4.35 Section 8 of the NPPF addresses the way planning can promote healthy
communities and the Local Plan policies Strategy 3 and Strategy 4 provide
for the achievement of sustainable development and balanced
communities including by conserving and enhancing the environment and
promoting social well-being. Paragraph 76 of the NPPF enables local
communities through local and neighbourhood plans to identify for special
protection green areas of particular importance to them. By designating
land as Local Green Space (LGS), local communities are able to rule out
new development other than in very special circumstances. Thus, policies
identifying LGSs must be consistent with planning for sustainable
development and must complement investment in sufficient homes, jobs
and other essential services. They should be capable of enduring beyond
the end of the Plan period.
4.36 Stringent criteria on Local Green Spaces are set out in the NPPF at
paragraph 77 and there is further advice in the PPG. Policy NP5
designates 24 open spaces as LGSs within the parishes and they are
identified by letter on the Inset maps in Appendix 1. They are varied in
character and include sports pitches, school playing fields, greens and
parks, play areas, and woodland. Descriptions and assessments of the
spaces against the NPPF criteria are provided in the background papers.
Having regard to this evidence, and what I saw on my site visit, I am
satisfied that the following spaces are local in character, but not extensive
tracts of land, are demonstrably special and in close proximity to the
community they serve. They should therefore be listed in policy NP5.
They are: land at Canaan Park, Ottery St Mary (h), Millennium Green,
Ottery St Mary (i), allotments, Higher Ridgeway, Ottery St Mary (j), the
play park, Butts Road, Ottery St Mary (l), Claremont Field, Ottery St Mary
(t), the play area by the school/village hall West Hill (m), Woodland
Trust wood, Higher Broad Oak Road, West Hill (o), Elsdon Wood, West Hill
(p), Broad Oak plantation (q), West Hill, Tipton St John playing fields (r),
and Kings School playing fields towards Strawberry Lane (u).
4.37 The NPPF cautions that LGS designation will not be appropriate for most
green areas or open space and I have carefully considered the case for
including in policy NP5 the playing fields of Ottery St Mary, Tipton St John
and West Hill primary schools. In response to my question, the Working
Group has said that it would not want to see these school playing fields
being sold off for general development. However, the NPPF at paragraph
74 is clear that such land should not be built on unless rigorous tests are
met and Local Plan policy RC1 resists the loss of open space used for
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 22
recreational purposes. They are also proposed to be protected under
policy NP17, as community facilities of value. Whilst I am mindful of the
advice in the PPG that consideration should be given to whether any
additional local benefit would be gained by designation as LGS, from what
I saw on my visit and the assessments provided, I am satisfied that LGS
designation is warranted for these three sites. Each of the playing fields is
compact, local to the community it serves, and demonstrably special
because of its recreational value. Accordingly, I consider it appropriate to
include Ottery St Mary primary school playing fields (g), Tipton St John
primary school playing field (s), and West Hill primary school playing field
(n) in policy NP5.
4.38 The Working Group has agreed that the play areas at the new housing
developments at Gerway Nurseries (v) and at the Kings Reach site (w)
probably do not meet the LGS criteria and it was content that they be
removed from policy NP5 (PM10). As to Barton Orchard, Tipton St John
(x), the PPG does not preclude new green areas, planned as part of a new
residential development, being designated as LGS if they are
demonstrably special and hold particular local significance17. The Barton
Orchard development is on the edge of the village, on a sloping site within
the AONB. I am satisfied that both the open play area at the entrance to
the development and the attractive area of hillside which is to be
informally laid out as open space meet these criteria. However, a minor
modification is needed (PM11) to the Tipton St John Inset map to ensure
the areas are delineated accurately.
4.39 There is considerable overlap between policy NP5 and policy NP17 which
strongly resists the loss of community facilities of value listed in Appendix
5. The Appendix lists places like the Hospital, Old Town Hall, scout huts,
village stores, but it also includes many of the outdoor sports’ facilities
that are also proposed to be designated as LGSs. Sports’ clubs do change
over time and may seek to invest in features such as new clubhouses,
indoor sports’ facilities and floodlighting to enhance their facilities. Whilst
the PPG does not preclude LGSs including sports’ pavilions, proposed
additions or changes to them may not be seen as consistent with
maintaining the land as ‘Local Green Space’. In my view, it would benefit
the Ottery St Mary Cricket Club (a), the Ottery St Mary Town Council
sports facility (b), the Ottery St Mary Football Club (c), the football pitch
and playground on Clapps Lane, Ottery St Mary (d), the Tennis Courts off
Winters Lane (e), the Kings School sports pitches (f), and the Skate Park,
off Cadhay Lane (k), in the future if they were protected by policy NP17
and not also by policy NP5. This would achieve greater consistency with
the NPPF, paragraph 77, and I propose a modification accordingly
(PM12).
17 PPG Reference ID: 37-012-20140306.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 23
4.40 Providing the modifications set out above are made, I conclude that policy
NP5 will appropriately provide for the designation and protection of LGSs,
in accordance with national policy and guidance and the need to be
consistent with the local planning of sustainable development, and in
general conformity with strategic policies of the Local Plan. Accordingly,
the Basic Conditions will be met.
Issue 3 – housing, community facilities, infrastructure and the economy
4.41 Objectives of the Plan include the promotion of sustainability, supporting
the housing needs of the current and future community of the parishes,
whilst ensuring that their social and physical infrastructure needs are met
and supporting the local economy.
Housing
4.42 In recent years, there has been significant new housing development in
Ottery St Mary and West Hill and consultation on the Plan identified
widespread concern that this had placed significant pressure on the area’s
infrastructure. The Spatial Strategy in the Local Plan is to direct large-
scale development to the West End and the main towns whilst
development in the smaller towns, villages and rural areas is to be geared
to meeting local needs. Within Ottery St Mary, the strategy is to see
development focused on meeting local needs and making the town a more
vibrant centre (Strategy 24). Whilst there are no specific housing
allocations for the towns and villages in the period till 2031, Strategy 6
does allow for development within the defined BUABs of Ottery St Mary
and the sustainable village of West Hill, subject to meeting stringent
criteria.
4.43 It is national policy in the NPPF that planning should deliver a wide choice
of high quality homes and plan for a mix of housing based on current and
future demographic trends. Strategy 4 of the Local Plan notes that many
East Devon communities have an overtly aged population profile and
encourages residential development that will be suited to or provide for
younger people and younger families and development management
policy H2 seeks a range and mix of new housing. Census data and
demographic projections indicate that the Plan area has an ageing
population that is set to increase in the future, but at the same time
affordability is an issue for families and younger people with a limited
supply of smaller and cheaper houses. The Plan appropriately addresses
these issues, through policy NP12 which requires all residential
development to include an appropriate housing mix reflecting local need
and to deliver smaller homes suitable for families and/or elderly people,
and policy NP13 which supports the provision of accessible and adaptable
homes in all housing developments, in general conformity with Strategy
36 of the Local Plan.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 24
4.44 In the smaller villages and countryside, Local Plan Strategy 35 provides
for exception sites aimed at securing affordable housing where there is a
proven local need. In accord with the strategy, the Plan through policy
NP27 allocates a small exception site in Alfington for a development of up
to 5 homes, of which 3 are to be affordable. The site is physically well
related to the built form of the village, is supported by the local
community, and I am satisfied that, subject to the inclusion of the
Alfington Inset map in the Plan (PM13), the allocation is in general
conformity with the strategic policies of the Local Plan and would
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.
Infrastructure
4.45 It is recognised in the Local Plan that in the past infrastructure has not
always kept ‘in step’ with development and Strategy 50 deals with
infrastructure delivery and the production of an Infrastructure Delivery
Plan for East Devon (IDP). The IDP was reviewed in November 2017 and
paragraph 7.18 should be updated to reflect the most recent information
on infrastructure needs (PM14). Chapter 7 of the Plan is entitled
Community and, in addition to the housing policies NP12 and NP13 (see
above), includes policies to address the local community’s concerns about
increasing pressure on existing infrastructure and ensure that future
developments are supported by adequate infrastructure. In requiring
developers to demonstrate how the infrastructure needs of the
development will be addressed and in supporting health and social care
infrastructure and schools, policies NP14, NP15 and NP16 are in general
conformity with Strategies 3, 4, 24 and 50 of the Local Plan, have regard
to national policy, and will contribute to the achievement of sustainable
development, thus meeting the Basic Conditions.
Education
4.46 Land in Ottery St Mary is identified in the Plan for education uses (policy
NP25). The Local Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan both note the existing
pressure on primary school places locally and in the surrounding area with
a recent proposal and consultation on a new primary school to allow for
the relocation of the school at Tipton St John and to serve developments
in Ottery St Mary. Whilst some 3.27ha of land west of The King’s School
is allocated in the Local Plan for community and educational uses, the
Neighbourhood Plan through policy NP25 now proposes that around
6.64ha is safeguarded ‘for education or community use, with strong
preference to be given to meeting the educational needs of the
Neighbourhood Plan area’.
4.47 This is justified in the Plan by the need not only to provide land for a new
primary school but also to safeguard additional land for The King’s School,
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 25
which is described as being currently at capacity. The recent IDP Review
identifies a new primary school at Ottery St Mary as critical (priority 1
with delivery 2019-20) to the delivery of the vision, objectives and policies
of the Local Plan. However, additional secondary school places are seen
as less critical (priority 2 for delivery 2017-31), although the IDP Schedule
notes that The Kings School will be over capacity due to additional
dwellings in its catchment area, and currently has no land on which to
expand nor finances to buy land or create the significant build to take
more students.
4.48 Representations made by NPS SW Ltd on behalf of Devon County Council
as landowner of the NP25 allocation question the Plan’s focus on
secondary provision and object to the safeguarding of more land. It does
not appear to be in doubt that primary provision is under significant
pressure but their evidence is that the existing allocation in the Local Plan
is more than adequate to accommodate a 210-place primary school as
well as the skateboard park. As to secondary provision, I note that the
2015 consultation on the Neighbourhood Plan with the education
department of Devon County Council did not indicate a need for additional
secondary capacity, noting that any difficulty was due to the high level of
parental preference for The King’s School from outside its catchment.
4.49 Advice in the PPG18 is that a neighbourhood plan can allocate additional
sites to those in a Local Plan where this is supported by evidence to
demonstrate need above that identified in the Local Plan. In this case, I
am not satisfied by the evidence that it has been demonstrated that there
is a need here for secondary provision that justifies an allocation that is
substantially larger than that in the Local Plan. It is clear on any reading
of Strategy 24 that the Local Plan allocation was to provide for additional
primary school places, as well as community uses, and this is confirmed in
the IDP where a new primary school at Ottery St Mary is seen as critical.
Whilst The King’s School has recently undertaken some rationalisation and
new development of classrooms and canteen facilities, I have not been
shown any evidence of plans to increase its intake. But, even if there
were a requirement for additional secondary places, I understand that the
County Council could not direct The King’s School, as an Academy school,
to meet it.
4.50 Taking these matters together, and particularly given that the Local Plan
allocation is more than sufficient to accommodate a new primary school,
along with any proposed community uses, I conclude that the NP25
allocation of land to the west of The King’s School, as shown on the
Neighbourhood Plan Proposals Map, is not justified and should be deleted
(PM15). I am however satisfied that there is merit in the detailed criteria
of policy NP25 remaining in the Plan to give guidance to developers on the
18 PPG Reference ID: 41-044-20160519.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 26
form of development that would be acceptable on the site allocated in the
Local Plan, including ensuring that the ability of The King’s School to
expand in the future is not compromised. Providing my modifications are
made, policy NP25 will meet the Basic Conditions.
Community facilities
4.51 Those living in the villages in the Plan area are particularly reliant on their
local facilities and their retention is a key factor in helping to secure the
villages’ sustainable future. Policy NP17 seeks to resist the loss of a wide
range of community facilities that are highly valued locally and seen as
making an important contribution to residents’ quality of life. In addition
to sports pitches/clubs/tennis courts, parks and allotments, Appendix 5
identifies village halls, pubs, post offices, local convenience stores, the
library, and youth club facilities as community facilities of value. From
what I saw on my visit, I am satisfied that all the sites and premises listed
are of value to their communities and warrant protection. I conclude that
the first part of policy NP17 meets the Basic Conditions, and by
contributing to the achievement of sustainable development has regard to
national policy and is in general conformity with strategic policies in the
Local Plan to promote social wellbeing (Strategy 3), provide for balanced
communities (Strategy 4), and resist the loss of employment, retail and
community sites and buildings (Strategy 32).
4.52 However I have reservations about the second part of policy NP17, which
resists any changes of use or redevelopment of the two listed Assets of
Community Value. Given that the Local Plan already includes a strategic
policy that resists the loss of employment, retail and community sites and
buildings (Strategy 32), I am not satisfied that the second part of policy
NP17 adds anything that is locally distinctive. For this reason, I am
modifying the Plan to delete the second part of policy NP17 (PM16).
The Economy
4.53 Chapter 8 of the Plan deals with the economy and Ottery St Mary is
supported as the economic focus for the Plan area. With a Sainsbury’s
supermarket, shops, services, secondary school and health, social and
cultural facilities, it is the service centre for the area and identified in the
Local Plan as one of the main towns in East Devon where development to
meet local needs should be focused (Strategy 24). However, like many
small towns, the commercial vitality of Ottery St Mary has suffered in
recent years, despite the influx of new residents and the first part of
policy NP18 seeks to redress the balance by encouraging new retail
development in the town centre, the retention and enhancement of
existing retail frontages, and new and improved employment premises
and sites. It has regard to national policy which seeks to ensure the
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 27
vitality of town centres and build a strong, competitive economy19, is in
general conformity with strategic policy in the Local Plan and would
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.
4.54 The second part of policy NP18 seeks to address the re-use of already
redundant and unoccupied former employment, social or community
premises. However, it adds nothing locally distinctive or different to Local
Plan Strategy 32 which includes criteria on listed buildings and on the
marketing of unoccupied premises. When made, the Neighbourhood Plan
will form part of the development plan and with two policies saying nearly
the same thing there is inevitably potential for confusion that can be
exploited. In the interests of clarity, I am modifying policy NP18 by the
deletion of the second part (PM17).
4.55 The Local Plan allocates an additional 2.2 hectares for employment uses at
the Finnimore Industrial Estate in Ottery St Mary and policy NP19 provides
support for the delivery of a high-quality development including
improvements to the appearance of the Estate on an important gateway
to the town. Industrial traffic is not suited to the narrow, congested
streets of the town centre and the policy wants to ensure that HGV traffic
accesses the site from the west, from the Daisymount junction with the
A30. However, it seems to me that what the policy is seeking to secure is
not a Travel Plan per se, but that applications are accompanied by a
Transport Assessment20, described in the PPG as a thorough assessment
of the potential transport implications of development, and which could
include mitigation measures to promote sustainable development
including the preparation of a Travel Plan21. A Transport Assessment
should also consider the impact of traffic from any new development on
the strategic road network (A30). Subject to these modifications (PM18),
I am satisfied that policy NP19 meets the Basic Conditions.
4.56 The Plan refers at paragraph 8.10 to the tourism potential of the area for
both day trips and longer stays. Whilst there are already some facilities,
evidence is that the tourist offer could be significantly enhanced,
supporting more local jobs and enhancing the vitality and vibrancy of
Ottery St Mary town centre and the area generally. National policy
supports sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments that can
benefit businesses in rural areas and communities as well as visitors. The
Local Plan through policies Strategy 28 and Strategy 33 is also supportive
of rural diversification and tourism and development management policy
E20 supports the provision of visitor attractions. The Plan through policy
NP20 specifically encourages small scale farm-based tourism, re-using
19 NPPF paragraphs 21 and 23. 20 PPG Reference ID: 42-004-20140306. 21 A Travel Plan is long-term management strategy for integrating proposals for
sustainable travel into the planning process.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 28
redundant farm buildings, establishing campsites and providing
accommodation in yurts or shepherd huts. I am satisfied that it would
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and meets the
Basic Conditions.
4.57 Within the Plan area, 2011 census data indicates an above average
proportion of people who work from home and with improved technology,
this is likely to become more common. The NPPF recognises the
importance of an advanced, high quality communications infrastructure for
sustainable economic growth and slow broadband has been a constraint in
the area. To address this, policy NP21 supports and encourages the
provision of high speed broadband to achieve full coverage of the two
parishes. But whilst the policy, in line with Local Plan Strategy 31, is
generally supportive of development to provide appropriate homeworking
facilities subject to there being no adverse effects on neighbours, this is
limited to development within existing settlements as is the provision of or
conversion of existing buildings to live-work units.
4.58 National policy supports the sustainable growth and expansion of all types
of business and enterprise in rural areas, both through conversion of
existing buildings and well-designed new buildings22. To promote
sustainable development in rural areas, the NPPF at paragraph 55 is also
supportive of housing where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural
communities and provides for cases where residential development may
be accepted, such as the re-use of redundant or disused buildings or
where development represents the optimal viable use of heritage assets.
Paragraph 15.9 of the Local Plan refers to the District Council’s keenness
to promote employment opportunities in rural areas and I do not consider
that policy NP21, by limiting new or converted live-work units to existing
settlements and precluding, for example, the conversion of rural buildings
for such purposes, has sufficient regard to national and strategic policy for
rural areas. However, subject to modification to remove the references to
existing settlements (PM19), I am satisfied that policy NP21 would
contribute toward the achievement of sustainable development and meet
the Basic Conditions.
Flooding
4.59 The River Otter and its tributaries run through the heart of the Plan area
and significant areas are identified by the Environment Agency as at risk
of flooding. Section 10 of the NPPF sets out policy on meeting the
challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change. Along with
Strategies 3 and 5 on sustainable development and the environment,
Strategy 38 of the Local Plan recognises the need to take account of
climate change and for new developments to minimise vulnerability and
22 NPPF paragraph 28.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 29
build in resilience, with development management policies EN21 and EN22
addressing issues of river and coastal flooding and surface water run-off.
There is specific mention at paragraph 12.5 h) to promoting measures to
reduce potential future flooding and avoid development on the extensive
flood zones to the West and North of Ottery St Mary. But whilst policy
NP7 of the Neighbourhood Plan is supportive of proposals for flood
defences and alleviation measures, I am concerned at the use of the word
‘usually’ before ‘be encouraged and supported’. Without any further detail
in the supporting text to explain or justify that qualification, it undermines
the policy and I am recommending that it be deleted (PM20).
4.60 Providing the recommended modifications are made, I am satisfied that
the Plan’s policies for housing, infrastructure including education facilities,
community facilities, the economy and flooding, will meet the Basic
Conditions.
Issue 4 – accessibility and energy policies
Accessibility
4.61 The Plan from page 38 deals with accessibility and describes congestion
and road safety as the big challenge and that traffic related issues were
the number one concern of residents when consulted on the Plan. The
Local Plan also refers in the justification supporting Strategy 24 to traffic
congestion in the town centre. Projects supported by the Town and Parish
Councils seek to enhance road safety, to develop a local green
infrastructure network and support public transport. Accessible
development is addressed in policy NP9 which requires new development
to provide for safe pedestrian and cycle connections to reduce reliance on
the private car. This policy is in accord with national policy in the NPPF
which promotes sustainable transport and healthy communities and with
Local Plan Strategies 5B and 24 and will contribute to the achievement of
sustainable development.
4.62 It has been a longstanding aspiration of the Town, Parish, District and
County Councils to explore the potential for a cycle and walking route
from Feniton to the coast at Sidmouth, which would broadly follow the
route of the former railway track as a safe off-road connection and
provide the backbone for the Green Infrastructure Network for the area.
Policy NP10 sets out local support for this link and encourages its delivery
with an indicative route shown on the Proposals Map. A project is also
identified for delivery of this link. I am satisfied that the policy is in
general conformity with strategic policies for sustainable transport and
tourism, has regard to national policy and meets the Basic Conditions.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 30
Energy
4.63 Whilst national policy encourages the use of renewable resources, it
recognises that adverse impacts should be satisfactorily addressed in
policies, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts. The Local
Plan considers renewables at paragraphs 17.15 to 17.18 and in Strategy
39. Given the openness of the topography and attractive landscape of the
Otter Valley, the Plan through policy NP11 does not support wind turbines
or medium or large scale photovoltaic installations and requires proposals
for farm based anaerobic digesters to demonstrate that any adverse
impacts can be mitigated. I am satisfied that the policy is justified having
regard to the character of the Plan area, has regard to national policy, is
in general conformity with strategic policies of the Local Plan and would
contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, thus meeting
the Basic Conditions.
5. Conclusions
Summary
5.1 The Neighbourhood Plan for the Parishes of Ottery St Mary and West Hill
has been duly prepared in compliance with the procedural requirements. My examination has investigated whether the Plan meets the Basic
Conditions and other legal requirements for neighbourhood plans. I have had regard for all the responses made following consultation on the Neighbourhood Plan, and the evidence documents submitted with it.
5.2 I have made recommendations to modify a number of policies and text to
ensure the Plan meets the Basic Conditions and other legal requirements. I recommend that the Plan, once modified, proceeds to referendum.
The Referendum and its Area
5.3 I have considered whether or not the referendum area should be extended
beyond the designated area to which the Plan relates. The Neighbourhood
Plan for the Parishes of Ottery St Mary and West Hill as modified has no policy or proposals which I consider significant enough to have an impact
beyond the designated neighbourhood plan boundary, requiring the
referendum to extend to areas beyond the plan boundary. I recommend
that the boundary for the purposes of any future referendum on the Plan should be the boundary of the designated neighbourhood plan area.
Overview
5.4 I recognise that the Plan is the product of a lot of hard work by the Working Group and the Ottery St Mary Town Council and the newly formed West Hill Parish Council, at a time of great change with the two
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 31
parishes having to work together in unusual circumstances where they had once been one body. Considerable effort has been put in over the
last two years to achieve the submitted Plan and, in the process, there has been engagement with a large number of local people and
stakeholders. The output is a Plan which should help guide the area’s future development in a positive way with the support of the local community. I commend the Town and Parish Councils and the Working
Group for producing this Plan which, subject to some modifications, will influence development management decisions over the next 13 years.
Mary O’Rourke
Examiner
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 32
Appendix: Modifications
Proposed
modification
number (PM)
Page no./
other
reference
Modification
PM1 Page 25 Policy NP1
Delete the first sentence.
Replace the word ‘it’ in the second
sentence with ‘development in the
countryside’.
PM2 Page 29 Policy NP3 Insert (A) before ‘Planning permission
… ‘and include under policy NP3 (A) the
four criteria on the left hand side of page 29.
Insert (B) before ‘Proposals’ and after
‘Proposals’ insert ‘for residential development for one or more
dwellings on infill, backland and
residential garden sites’ before the words ‘will be resisted if:’ and then
include under policy NP3 (B) the 5 criteria
listed on the right hand side of page 29.
PM3 Page 30
Amend Appendix 1 to the Plan to remove
the green lines shown on the Ottery St
Mary and West Hill Inset Maps and
include the new plan (attached to Jo
Talbot’s email of 19 February 2018)
showing the NP4 settlement containment
area at a scale of 1:12,500.
PM4 Page 34 Amend policy NP6 to replace ‘these are
listed at Appendix 2’ by ‘these are
shown on the Key Viewpoints maps in
Appendix 1’.
Include the 4 Key Viewpoints maps in
Appendix 1.
Delete Appendix 2 and renumber
accordingly.
PM5 Page 37 Delete the text of policy NP8 and replace
with the text of paragraph 6.31.
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 33
PM6 Page 67 Delete the second sentence of policy
NP22.
PM7 Page 70 Delete the words ‘and highway
improvements’ from the title of policy
NP23.
PM8 Page 86 Ensure that the up to date BUAB is shown on the West Hill Inset in Appendix 1.
PM9 Pages 74
and 104
onwards
Delete paragraph 10.5 and Appendix 6
PM10 Page 32 Delete spaces (v) and (w) from policy NP5.
PM11 Page 87 Redraw the Barton Orchard LGSs on the
Tipton St John Inset to reflect the areas of open space shown on the permitted
development scheme.
PM12 Page 32 Delete spaces (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (k) from policy NP5 and renumber accordingly.
PM13 Page 87 Include the Alfington Inset Map.
PM14 Page 52 Rewrite paragraph 7.18 to reflect most recent information in the Infrastructure
Delivery Plan Review of November 2017.
PM15 Page 72 In Policy NP25 delete the words ‘as shown on the Neighbourhood Plan Proposals
Map’ and replace with ‘as shown on the
East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Proposals Map’.
PM16 Page 56 Delete the second part of policy NP17.
PM17 Page 60 Delete the second part of policy NP18 from ‘In addition to ……’.
PM18 Page 61 Delete the second part of policy NP19 and
replace with the following:
‘Applications for employment development at Finnimore Industrial
Estate should be accompanied by a
Transport Assessment, to include the assessment of the impact of traffic on
the A30 and on Ottery St Mary town
centre, and include measures to
Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd, Regency Offices, 37 Gay Street, Bath BA1 2NT Registered in England and Wales. Company Reg. No. 10100118. VAT Reg. No. 237 7641 84 34
direct HGV traffic to access the Estate
from Daisymount to the west.’
PM19 Page 64 In policy 21 remove in lines 3 and 8 the words ‘within existing settlements’.
PM20 Page 36 In policy NP7 delete the word ‘usually’ in
the third line.